Jump to content

Trade and Free Agency rumours


Nascent

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Turner said:

i was doing some analysis before and i realised we only need to delist two players at EOS to meet afl criteria. for the purpose of the exercise i've nominated mbrown who has done his 3yr rookie stint and is 32 and baker who didn't play a snr game and has been on the list for 5 years. chandler getting upgraded uses one pick and takes bakers list slot. taking us from 35senior 5A1B to 35S 4A1B and mbrown delisting takes us down to 35S 3A1B. this means we can then change our list structure from the 36S 6A1B setup we had this year to the 38S (either 3 draftees ontop of the chandler upgrade) or 37S (only two draftees plus chandler) and 4A1B (could be 2B if finn emile-brennan goes all the way through. 

everyone seems to think we need to make lots of calls and i get we want to find ways to improve our list etc etc but its interesting how it can be manipulated in certain ways if theres nothing we like. and we could have 2 rookie spots to trial players over the SPP and trial up to 6 players for those spots on a realistic universe

I thought you had to delist 3 players rookies not included?

The way I see the list Jackson gets traded, Baker gets delisted and Rosman gets delisted then re rookied. Mitch is a rookie I think he will retire Majak has already retired Rosman will take his spot. We recruit Grundy and Chandler gets promoted that leaves us with one draft pick and 2 rookie picks.

 

Senior team

B: Lever, May, Hibberd

HB: Hunt, Petty, Salem

C: Langdon, Brayshaw, Jordon

HF: Petracca, McDonald, Pickett

F: Fritsch, B.Brown, Gawn

FOLL: Grundy, Oliver, Viney

IC: Harmes, Sparrow, Spargo, Neal-Bullen

SUB: Rivers

 

Casey

B: D.Smith, Turner, Rosman

HB: Bowey, Tomlinson, Rivers

C: Howes, Dunstan, Woewodin

HF: Laurie, van Rooyen, Melksham

F: Bedford, J.Smith, Chandler

FOLL: Weideman, Rookie, Rookie

IC: McVee, Moniz-Wakefield, Draft Pick Key Forward  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

I thought you had to delist 3 players rookies not included?

The way I see the list Jackson gets traded, Baker gets delisted and Rosman gets delisted then re rookied. Mitch is a rookie I think he will retire Majak has already retired Rosman will take his spot. We recruit Grundy and Chandler gets promoted that leaves us with one draft pick and 2 rookie picks.

 

Senior team

B: Lever, May, Hibberd

HB: Hunt, Petty, Salem

C: Langdon, Brayshaw, Jordon

HF: Petracca, McDonald, Pickett

F: Fritsch, B.Brown, Gawn

FOLL: Grundy, Oliver, Viney

IC: Harmes, Sparrow, Spargo, Neal-Bullen

SUB: Rivers

 

Casey

B: D.Smith, Turner, Rosman

HB: Bowey, Tomlinson, Rivers

C: Howes, Dunstan, Woewodin

HF: Laurie, van Rooyen, Melksham

F: Bedford, J.Smith, Chandler

FOLL: Weideman, Rookie, Rookie

IC: McVee, Moniz-Wakefield, Draft Pick Key Forward  

Werridee you have fallen for the Goody plan! 

We need to evolve with new youth each year and another pre season should enable this to happen. 
 

Rivers in the AFL and med sub  role  for Hibbo.

Bowey over Hunt still improves our team.

Turner to the defence and Petty forward  to CHF 

JVR to FF in place of BBB 

At least one of Howes/ Chandler/ Laurie to I/C in place of either ANB / Spargo.

Joel Smith in 23 maybe tried  as a forward / onballer to replace Sparrow. 

Not  all  replacements might be for Round1 but these possible or similar  changes are necessary for us to improve especially our skills and forward  line for us to be in Top4 reckoning. 

Yes it's left field a bit but Goody has to do 2 years in one upgrading of our 2021 Flag side as 2022 was a dormant year. 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By my guessing it's quite simple. Daw has already retired and Mitch Brown will be desisted leaving 2 rookie spots. Rosman will be desisted and re-rookied while Chandler will be promoted which cancels eachother out.

It sounds as though both Tomlinson and Bedford might be traded off the senior list at seasons end to other clubs while Baker will be delisted.

That gives us 3 senior list spots and 2 rookie list spots. If we lose Jackson we can bring Grundy in for him and what happens from there on in with Hunt, Hibberd and Melksham can determine if we use more than 3 picks or target other trade options or DFA's.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Turner said:

i was doing some analysis before and i realised we only need to delist two players at EOS to meet afl criteria. for the purpose of the exercise i've nominated mbrown who has done his 3yr rookie stint and is 32 and baker who didn't play a snr game and has been on the list for 5 years. chandler getting upgraded uses one pick and takes bakers list slot. taking us from 35senior 5A1B to 35S 4A1B and mbrown delisting takes us down to 35S 3A1B. this means we can then change our list structure from the 36S 6A1B setup we had this year to the 38S (either 3 draftees ontop of the chandler upgrade) or 37S (only two draftees plus chandler) and 4A1B (could be 2B if finn emile-brennan goes all the way through. 

everyone seems to think we need to make lots of calls and i get we want to find ways to improve our list etc etc but its interesting how it can be manipulated in certain ways if theres nothing we like. and we could have 2 rookie spots to trial players over the SPP and trial up to 6 players for those spots on a realistic universe

Most clubs will max out their A rookies as a chunk of their salary doesn't count for TPP hence why Jordon, Chandler and Turner were given hybrid rookie/senior promotion contracts.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very soon we will have an age profile and quality gap in our list of 18-22 year olds which will become a gap in the 23-26 age group and so on.  We have players in that age group but not many have found a way to break into the team and only a couple have prospects of doing so in the next year or two.  So quantity is ok but quality is a ?

This is happening while we have list deficiencies in critical positions.

In 2-3 years quite a few of our stars will be approaching or over 30.  Many players go on to play well after 30 but how do we replace the quality of so many before their contribution starts to wane? 

Because we are successful and tend to trade out our future first pick we are unlikely to have access to the top dozen or so players in each draft.  And we are unlikely to trade out our best players as they are on long-term deals.  Our list will age rapidly.

To some this may not matter as 'we are in the premiership window' with a star midfield, defence etc. however if we don't start getting access to the pointy end of the draft I'm not sure we can sustain finals participation/be in contention for flags in the latter part of this decade.

As much as Taylor is a star he needs picks to work with to keep our list age/quality profile balanced and I'm not sure where pointy end draft picks are coming from in the next 3-4 years.

Edited by Lucifers Hero
  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we dont keep refreshing the list, we will have short fall of top end  young talent.

That is why, i can tell you we want a pick inside the top 5/6 and another in the top 18 for Jackson. Which I still see no one can possibly tell us how this deal is going to get it done for Jackson?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is seriously dumb list management to not be turning over a minimum of 5-6 players each year.

What is the point of retaining guys like Baker and Chandler when they are clearly not in the coach's plans? Let alone having a guy like Smith spending more time in rehab than on the field each year.

Our depth is nowhere near as good as it is made out to be by some, and we need to keep looking for new talent, particularly in the forward line. With so many of our players currently in the 26 - 27 age bracket, we become a very old team very quickly otherwise.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Very soon we will have an age profile and quality gap in our list of 18-22 year olds which will become a gap in the 23-26 age group and so on.  We have players in that age group but not many have found a way to break into the team and only a couple have prospects of doing so in the next year or two.  So quantity is ok but quality is a ?

This is happening while we have list deficiencies in critical positions.

In 2-3 years quite a few of our stars will be approaching or over 30.  Many players go on to play well after 30 but how do we replace their quality before their contribution starts to wane? 

Because we are successful and tend to trade out our future first pick we are unlikely to have access to the top dozen or so players in each draft.  And we are unlikely to trade out our best players as they are on long-term deals.  Our list will age rapidly.

To some this may not matter as 'we are in the premiership window' with a star midfield, defence etc. however if we don't start getting access to the pointy end of the draft I'm not sure we can sustain finals participation/be in contention for flags in the latter part of this decade.

As much as Taylor is a star he needs picks to work with to keep our list age/quality profile balanced and I'm not sure where pointy end draft picks are coming from in the next 3-4 years.

Agree wholeheartedly.

This is why the narrative of wasting a 1st round pick on a 29 year old ruckman just spells disaster for me from a list demographic point of view.

Whilst our starting midfield is of high end talent, there is a significant drop in depth from that 26/27 years age bracket and below.

Petracca, Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw is obviously our midfield set up that'll keep us going for the next 2-3 years. After that there is a significant drop in depth coming through in my opinion. 

Sparrow has been underwhelming for me this year and I only see him as an honest battler moving forward. He's the only young player that is usually given fair bit of midfield minutes. Other then that I don't see where the next wave of talent is coming through from a midfield perspective. 

I reckon topping up our midfield pool with elite junior talent is right up there as a big need for us on equal with getting some key forward depth.

My other concern is Goodwins reluctance in being able to introduce fresh players or regenerate team selections along the way. We've had 3 debutants in two years. Collingwood have had 6 alone this year.

Our forward line has been an absolute mess mostly the 2nd half of the year and his unwillingness to give the likes of JVR, Laurie and Chandler a go to try mix things up a touch is concerning. I was always in the belief that Goodwin has always been about rewarding form at VFL level but that hasn't been the case at all.

His continued persistence of the likes of Weideman and Melksham ahead of others who have been in far better form throughout the year, who whilst Melky has been okay prior to the Sydney game is clearly not in our future plans moving forward.

I think the form of guys like Sparrow, ANB and Spargo to a degree have been inconsistent throughout the year. I get that Goody is wanting throw all his faith on the same blokes that won him a flag but when teams have spent all summer examining and studying our game plan right to the fine tooth comb then of course you're going to get losses like we have this year when our team selections and game plan gets stale and not tweaked.

I really do hope our list doesn't get Ross Lyon'd in the near future....

Edited by dazzledavey36
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


7 minutes ago, poita said:

It is seriously dumb list management to not be turning over a minimum of 5-6 players each year.

What is the point of retaining guys like Baker and Chandler when they are clearly not in the coach's plans? Let alone having a guy like Smith spending more time in rehab than on the field each year.

Our depth is nowhere near as good as it is made out to be by some, and we need to keep looking for new talent, particularly in the forward line. With so many of our players currently in the 26 - 27 age bracket, we become a very old team very quickly otherwise.

Keeping the likes of Mitch Brown and Baker  for another year after playing only a single game last year was utterly bizarre list manager. 

Either those spots should have been used on a developing tall either a ruckman or key forward.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

34 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

If we dont keep refreshing the list, we will have short fall of top end  young talent.

That is why, i can tell you we want a pick inside the top 5/6 and another in the top 18 for Jackson. Which I still see no one can possibly tell us how this deal is going to get it done for Jackson?

 

23 minutes ago, poita said:

It is seriously dumb list management to not be turning over a minimum of 5-6 players each year.

What is the point of retaining guys like Baker and Chandler when they are clearly not in the coach's plans? Let alone having a guy like Smith spending more time in rehab than on the field each year.

Our depth is nowhere near as good as it is made out to be by some, and we need to keep looking for new talent, particularly in the forward line. With so many of our players currently in the 26 - 27 age bracket, we become a very old team very quickly otherwise.

 

18 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Agree wholeheartedly.

This is why the narrative of wasting a 1st round pick on a 29 year old ruckman just spells disaster for me from a list demographic point of view.

Whilst our starting midfield is of high end talent, there is a significant drop in depth from that 26/27 years age bracket and below.

Petracca, Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw is obviously our midfield set up that'll keep us going for the next 2-3 years. After that there is a significant drop in depth coming through in my opinion. 

Sparrow has been underwhelming for me this year and I only see him as an honest battler moving forward. He's the only young player that is usually given fair bit of midfield minutes. Other then that I don't see where the next wave of talent is coming through from a midfield perspective. 

I reckon topping up our midfield pool with elite junior talent is right up there as a big need for us on equal with getting some key forward depth.

My other concern is Goodwins reluctance in being able to introduce fresh players or regenerate team selections along the way. We've had 3 debutants in two years. Collingwood have had 6 alone this year.

Our forward line has been an absolute mess mostly the 2nd half of the year and his unwillingness to give the likes of JVR, Laurie and Chandler a go to try mix things up a touch is concerning. I was always in the belief that Goodwin has always been about rewarding form at VFL level but that hasn't been the case at all.

His continued persistence of the likes of Weideman and Melksham ahead of others who have been in far better form throughout the year, who whilst Melky has been okay prior to the Sydney game is clearly not in our future plans moving forward.

I think the form of guys like Sparrow, ANB and Spargo to a degree have been inconsistent throughout the year. I get that Goody is wanting throw all his faith on the same blokes that won him a flag but when teams have spent all summer examining and studying our game plan right to the fine tooth comb then of course you're going to get losses like we have this year when our team selections and game plan gets stale and not tweaked.

It seems we are in agreement on the age/quality trend of our list. 

Not too many clear options for us to get ahead of that trend.

Tradeable players aren't likely to bring in good picks.  While we can trade those picks up the draft other clubs also want to and by regularly trading out our future 1st it doesn't leave a lot of currency (the Jackson trade this year aside) to work with.

The best 'ageing/quality' replenishment scenario would be Sydney but they have the Academy to top them up.  Then Geelong who have done very well replenishing their list, then Richmond and worst is the Hawks who have really bottomed out. 

Hopefully, we have our 'dynasty' before the aging of players kicks in. 

Edited by Lucifers Hero
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those critical of the list not being turned over prior to the 22 season would be wise to remember that season 20 and 21 were effectively wiped out at a lot of levels. It was a much more considered decision to work with what you’ve got rather than bring in what hasn’t had consistent games for 2 years.

Things return to normal this year, so we will see more informed decisions made.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Keeping the likes of Mitch Brown and Baker  for another year after playing only a single game last year was utterly bizarre list manager. 

Either those spots should have been used on a developing tall either a ruckman or key forward.

ok so say we moved on another two mature depth players last year for 18yo's suddenly we have zero depth, tbh we got relatively lucky again with injuries this season where we were able to swing the magnets for these one week injuries and essentially stay ahead of them rather than compiling multiple week injuries.

also if we'd delisted them both last year then we'd have reached this point in the season with a mandatory three list changes to make and no obvious candidates, you need to keep some balance, these players know the club the training standards the game plan sometimes just having a few extra familiar voices can add a lot and help bridge the gap to the fresh faces entering the club each year at casey. last year we shifted on 6 players in the 22-26 age bracket some rather unfairly imo as well as two 30yo veterans thats a lot of strong mature bodies off the list in one go, it would've been irresponsible to do any more than that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought our drafting last year was quite good but only time will tell.  The 'ins' were much better than the 'outs'.  Hopefully, they can find their way into the 22 next year to show what they have.

Not sure the delist/keep decisions last year would make much difference to the age/quality challenges in a few years time.

Edited by Lucifers Hero
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Keeping the likes of Mitch Brown and Baker  for another year after playing only a single game last year was utterly bizarre list manager. 

Either those spots should have been used on a developing tall either a ruckman or key forward.

It's fine keeping them on the list if you have faith in their ability at AFL level. But in Mitch Brown's case, we'd rather play a banged up BBB, despite MB's form at VFL being very good. And MB's last AFL game against the Crows was more than serviceable.

Retaining Baker was a head scratcher considering he's clearly not in our plans.

Should we lose LJ, I'd much rather go to the draft with our picks than blow it on Grundy.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

I thought you had to delist 3 players rookies not included?

The way I see the list Jackson gets traded, Baker gets delisted and Rosman gets delisted then re rookied. Mitch is a rookie I think he will retire Majak has already retired Rosman will take his spot. We recruit Grundy and Chandler gets promoted that leaves us with one draft pick and 2 rookie picks.

 

Senior team

B: Lever, May, Hibberd

HB: Hunt, Petty, Salem

C: Langdon, Brayshaw, Jordon

HF: Petracca, McDonald, Pickett

F: Fritsch, B.Brown, Gawn

FOLL: Grundy, Oliver, Viney

IC: Harmes, Sparrow, Spargo, Neal-Bullen

SUB: Rivers

 

Casey

B: D.Smith, Turner, Rosman

HB: Bowey, Tomlinson, Rivers

C: Howes, Dunstan, Woewodin

HF: Laurie, van Rooyen, Melksham

F: Bedford, J.Smith, Chandler

FOLL: Weideman, Rookie, Rookie

IC: McVee, Moniz-Wakefield, Draft Pick Key Forward  

Needs on top of your selected Senior team

- a senior KPF to fill the gap until JVR ready to go. Even if it’s a “Geelong style pensioner” for 1-2 seasons (and cover for BBB/TMac injuries)

- smart player with kicking skills / class as midfield/wing depth

- Classy small forward (with strong defensive pressure) to keep ANB/Spargo honest. Maybe Chandler/Bedford if they can step up to next level? 
 

Address the above 3 and it’s a premiership team 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, poita said:

It is seriously dumb list management to not be turning over a minimum of 5-6 players each year.

What is the point of retaining guys like Baker and Chandler when they are clearly not in the coach's plans? Let alone having a guy like Smith spending more time in rehab than on the field each year.

Our depth is nowhere near as good as it is made out to be by some, and we need to keep looking for new talent, particularly in the forward line. With so many of our players currently in the 26 - 27 age bracket, we become a very old team very quickly otherwise.

Interesting take considering we  finished second on the ladder and  Casey 1st. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Turner said:

ok so say we moved on another two mature depth players last year for 18yo's suddenly we have zero depth, tbh we got relatively lucky again with injuries this season where we were able to swing the magnets for these one week injuries and essentially stay ahead of them rather than compiling multiple week injuries.

also if we'd delisted them both last year then we'd have reached this point in the season with a mandatory three list changes to make and no obvious candidates, you need to keep some balance, these players know the club the training standards the game plan sometimes just having a few extra familiar voices can add a lot and help bridge the gap to the fresh faces entering the club each year at casey. last year we shifted on 6 players in the 22-26 age bracket some rather unfairly imo as well as two 30yo veterans thats a lot of strong mature bodies off the list in one go, it would've been irresponsible to do any more than that. 

Zero depth? They were barely used at all this year. Mitch Brown played 2 games and Baker zero. Baker hasn't even been named as an emergency at all this year and even with our messy forward line Brown was always well behind the pecking order.

There's depth and then there's keeping blokes on a list for far too long when they've produced little in return for a number of years.

Adding extra voices? You say it as if we are are lacking voice and leadership around the joint, we don't. We have ample amount of senior players on the list that provide enough voice to our young players.

Dropping two senior isn't going to drastically change all that all of a sudden. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, poita said:

It is seriously dumb list management to not be turning over a minimum of 5-6 players each year.

What is the point of retaining guys like Baker and Chandler when they are clearly not in the coach's plans? Let alone having a guy like Smith spending more time in rehab than on the field each year.

Our depth is nowhere near as good as it is made out to be by some, and we need to keep looking for new talent, particularly in the forward line. With so many of our players currently in the 26 - 27 age bracket, we become a very old team very quickly otherwise.

Playing devils advocate, I'd ask if we don't have good depth, why has our VFL team gone through the year dropping only the one game???

I agree the decision to keep Baker was a little odd? Maybe it was due to our lack of genuine wingmen? But Chandler was named sub several times in 2021 and the FD clearly rate him. Bedford has gone past him this year however.

Personally if you're right in contention then I see why you might only want to make the minimum amount of list changes required from season to season. However if you're some way off then I agree, you want to regenerate the list with a much stronger brush.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


9 minutes ago, mo64 said:

It's fine keeping them on the list if you have faith in their ability at AFL level. But in Mitch Brown's case, we'd rather play a banged up BBB, despite MB's form at VFL being very good. And MB's last AFL game against the Crows was more than serviceable.

Retaining Baker was a head scratcher considering he's clearly not in our plans.

Should we lose LJ, I'd much rather go to the draft with our picks than blow it on Grundy.

Yep, I agree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, mo64 said:

It's fine keeping them on the list if you have faith in their ability at AFL level. But in Mitch Brown's case, we'd rather play a banged up BBB, despite MB's form at VFL being very good. And MB's last AFL game against the Crows was more than serviceable.

Retaining Baker was a head scratcher considering he's clearly not in our plans.

Should we lose LJ, I'd much rather go to the draft with our picks than blow it on Grundy.

Absolutely. Get some quality picks to invest in youth, maybe bring in a much cheaper recycled option from elsewhere as cover in the ruck but the key is to keep getting quality young kids in. 

It shouldn't be forgotten either that being a new draftee playing alongside good premiership players can potentially fast track their development. It likely won't take forever like it used to in basket case environments of the past. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, MadAsHell said:

Playing devils advocate, I'd ask if we don't have good depth, why has our VFL team gone through the year dropping only the one game???

I agree the decision to keep Baker was a little odd? Maybe it was due to our lack of genuine wingmen? But Chandler was named sub several times in 2021 and the FD clearly rate him. Bedford has gone past him this year however.

Personally if you're right in contention then I see why you might only want to make the minimum amount of list changes required from season to season. However if you're some way off then I agree, you want to regenerate the list with a much stronger brush.

I would argue that our depth isn't great at an AFL level.

We don't have guys capable of coming in and performing to a level where they could be relied upon to effectively contribute.

An example from the weekend is Trac, if he's running round at 70% from early in the game and still considered better than the replacement option (Smith), our depth isn't good enough. He was a liability and everyone could see it. Joel Smith should have been furious

Our depth is also largely untried because of our success over the last few years, catch 22

Edited by BW511
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2022 at 5:22 PM, Red and Blue realist said:

We've previously gotten Pig off the Bombers and he goes alright, I wonder if the footy department will think the cure is Ham?

image.jpeg.d219db0e0e27a72099deed03a540d138.jpegimage.jpeg.d219db0e0e27a72099deed03a540d138.jpeg

Edited by monoccular
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

There's depth and then there's keeping blokes on a list for far too long when they've produced little in return for a number of years.

Adding extra voices? You say it as if we are are lacking voice and leadership around the joint, we don't. We have ample amount of senior players on the list that provide enough voice to our young players.

Dropping two senior isn't going to drastically change all that all of a sudden. 

we'll to some extent i agree, if it was up to me i probably woulda persevered with any of hore, declase or lockhart last year over baker but clearly we felt our defensive depth was stronger than our wing depth at the time. and mbrown deserved this year on our list and has done no harm by being on it.

and if you read my comment properly i said offering voice and leadership at casey and breaking that potential divide between the regular afl side and a group of up to 10 players on our list now aged 21 and under who hadn't tasted any senior football at all going into the year aside from 7 games of boweys.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, BW511 said:

I would argue that our depth isn't great at an AFL level.

We don't have guys capable of coming in and performing to a level where they could be relied upon to effectively contribute.

An example from the weekend is Trac, if he's running round at 70% from early in the game and still considered better than the replacement option (Smith), our depth isn't good enough. He was a liability and everyone could see it. Joel Smith should have been furious

Our depth is also largely untried because of our success over the last few years, catch 22

That's more around selection though isn't it? Joel Smith isn't an obvious replacement for Petracca. If they were to sub Petracca for Smith, Smith would need to go forward or back with one of those players then rotating into the midfield.

If Dunstan was the sub, then maybe they would have made the change?

  • Like 3
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depth is an illusion...just saying.

You never can cover your top end talent.

We do it as well as any but you are always going to get lesser otherwise that replacement would be a regular.

As for age profile...the AFL draft system is set up to make it impossible to have a balanced list.

Why do you think Richmond is on the wane, Hawthorn have dropped back and Geelong are aged pensioners.

The Cat's have worked the system better than anyone and might just grab the reward this year but they're one Cameron hamstring off tears.

This is why we need to make the most of the next couple of years...

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    DEFUSE THE BOMBERS by Meggs

    Last Saturday’s crushing loss to Fremantle, after being three goals ahead at three quarter time, should be motivation enough to bounce back for this very winnable Round 5 clash at Windy Hill. A first-time venue for the Melbourne AFLW team, this should be a familiar suburban, windy, footy environment for the players.   Essendon were brave and competitive last week against ladder leader Adelaide at Sturt’s home ground. A familiar name, Maddison Gay, was the Bombers best player with

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 30

    BLOW THE SIREN by Meggs

    Fremantle hosted the Demons on a sunny 20-degree Saturdayafternoon winning the toss and electing to defend in the first quarter against the 3-goal breeze favouring the Parry Street end. There was method here, as this would give the comeback queens, the Dockers, last use of the breeze. The Melbourne Coach had promised an improved performance, and we did start better than previous weeks, winning the ball out of the middle, using the breeze advantage and connecting to the forwards. 

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    GETAWAY by Meggs

    Calling all fit players. Expect every available Melbourne player to board the Virgin cross-continent flight to Perth for this Round 4 clash on Saturday afternoon at Fremantle Oval. It promises to be keenly contested, though Fremantle is the bookies clear favourite.  If we lose, finals could be remoter than Rottnest Island especially following on from the Dees 50-point dismantlement by North Melbourne last Sunday.  There are 8 remaining matches, over the next 7 weeks.  To Meggs’

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons

    DRUBBING by Meggs

    With Casey Fields basking in sunshine, an enthusiastic throng of young Demons fans formed a guard of honour for the evergreen and much admired 75-gamer Paxy Paxman. As the home team ran out to play, Paxy’s banner promised that the Demons would bounce back from last week’s loss to Brisbane and reign supreme.   Disappointingly, the Kangaroos dominated the match to win by 50 points, but our Paxy certainly did her bit.  She was clearly our best player, sweeping well in defence.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 4

    GARNER STRENGTH by Meggs

    In keeping with our tough draw theme, Week 3 sees Melbourne take on flag favourites, North Melbourne, at Casey Fields this Sunday at 1:05pm.  The weather forecast looks dry, a coolish 14 degrees and will be characteristically gusty.  Remember when Casey Fields was considered our fortress?  The Demons have lost two of their past three matches at the Field of Dreams, so opposition teams commute down the Princes Highway with more optimism these days.  The Dees held the highe

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1

    ALLY’S FIELDS by Meggs

    It was a sunny morning at Casey Fields, as Demon supporters young and old formed a guard of honour for fan favourite and 50-gamer Alyssa Bannan.  Banno’s banner stated the speedster was the ‘fastest 50 games’ by an AFLW player ever.   For Dees supporters, today was not our day and unfortunately not for Banno either. A couple of opportunities emerged for our number 6 but alas there was no sizzle.   Brisbane atoned for last week’s record loss to North Melbourne, comprehensively out

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 1

    GOOD MORNING by Meggs

    If you are driving or training it to Cranbourne on Saturday, don’t forget to set your alarm clock. The Melbourne Demons play the reigning premiers Brisbane Lions at Casey Fields this Saturday, with the bounce of the ball at 11:05am.  Yes, that’s AM.   The AFLW fixture shows deference to the AFL men’s finals games.  So, for the men it’s good afternoon and good evening and for the women it’s good morning.     The Lions were wounded last week by 44 points, their highest ever los

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 3

    HORE ON FIRE by Meggs

    The 40,000 seat $319 million redeveloped Kardinia Park Stadium was nowhere near capacity last night but the strong, noisy contingent of Melbourne supporters led by the DeeArmy journeyed to Geelong to witness a high-quality battle between two of the best teams in AFLW.   The Cats entered the arena to the blasting sounds of Zombie Nation and made a hot start kicking the first 2 goals. They brought tremendous forward half pressure, and our newly renovated defensive unit looked shaky.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons 11

    REMATCH by Meggs

    The Mighty Demons take on the confident Cats this Saturday night at the recently completed $319 million redeveloped GMHBA Stadium, with the bounce of the ball at 7:15pm. Our last game of 2023 was an agonisingly close 5-point semi-final loss to Geelong, and we look forward to Melbourne turning the tables this week. Practice match form was scratchy for both teams with the Demons losing practice matches to Carlton and Port Adelaide, while the Cats beat Collingwood but then lost to Essendo

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    AFLW Melbourne Demons
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...